91 CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
This chapter consists of two parts. The first part is conclusion which discusses all the main points in the previous chapters. The second part is the suggestions for the teacher and further research.
5.1 Conclusion
The classroom is a place where interactions of various kinds take place, affording learning opportunities to acquire second language learners (L2), as defined by Ellis (1999). Inside the classroom, a teacher takes an important role since the teacher conducts the process of the study and gives comprehensible input by giving explanation and question. In giving the comprehensible input, teacher does lots of things in the classroom and most of her activities are talking which shows the verbal communication with the students in her effort to present and discuss teaching learning material as clearly as possible.
Through teacher talk, the students learn the knowledge in the classroom on their own understanding which is also from teacher’s explanation and questions. The teacher’s explanation and questions often dominates the classroom talk which causes
the students have talk less in the classroom. This situation is opposite to the function of the teacher which expected the teacher to become a good facilitator who facilitates the students’ process of learning. However, in this research, the high initiation from the
92 The data of the study were taken by audio recording and audio visual recording inside the classroom. The researcher gathered the data, transcribed using Jefferson Transcription Notation, and analyzed them based on Seventeen Category System by Tsui Bik-May to find the frequency of Teacher Talk and Student Talk in Reading A classes. The findings of the study lead to the following conclusion:
1. Types of Teacher Talk which were used by the teacher of Reading A are elicit (factual question, yes no question, reasoning question, explanation question), information question, direct, nominate, inform, recapitulate, frame, check, evaluate (encouraging and negative), accept, comment and clue. The most commonly Teacher Talk used by the teacher is inform with percentage 23%, yes-no question with percentage 15.9%, and factual question with percentage 9.5%. In responding the students, teacher did accept with percentage 10.4% and clue with percentage 2.0%
2. Types of Student Talk which were used are reply (restricted reply and expanded reply), request, elicit, and interrupt. The common Student Talk used by the students is restricted reply with percentage 20.6% the students’ elicit only gets 2.2%.
The research’s result showed that the teacher used initiate especially inform to the students. This condition made the students’ responses emerge less inside the classroom. The teacher used “inform” type to give information that the students did
93 transferred better to the students; on the other hand, the students could not improve their target language.
5.2 Suggestion
The writer realizes that her study is far from perfect because of the numerous weaknesses in. Hence, the writer suggests some relevant points which could potentially improve this study.
5.2.1 Suggestion for Teachers
Teacher Talk can be advantageous for students to get a stronger grasp on the material of the course, based on the results of this research. Since this study was an observation of a reading course in English Department in one of private university in Surabaya, it would be beneficial for teachers of the Reading course. Acknowledging the relevancy of the resutls, the teacher could improve the teaching strategies and techniques inside the classroom to aim more on students’ production
inside the classroom. As the facilitator, the teacher has to support the students by giving chance to express and speak inside the classroom. Knowing that difficulties in learning the second language abound, the researcher would like to offer some suggestions that might be useful for the teaching – learning process:
1. As teachers, the talk should be based on the “quality” rather than the “quantity”. Good Teacher Talk should be judged by how effective the talk
94 2. As teachers, it is better to use the three stages of Reading inside the classroom so that the students could have better understanding about the passage in a more guided, linear and structured fashion. Moreover, in this English Department, the students would become future teachers who should fathom the implementation of the Reading stages.
5.2.2 Suggestion for further research
For further research, classroom interaction has several scopes that are worth investigating, so it is beneficial to conduct the similar study with a different
framework, such as, teachers questioning strategies to give more significant
contributions in the teaching and learning process, or the teachers questioning and feedback to the students’ response. Moreover, it is suggested to conduct an interview
with the students to shed more light on the students’ opinion about the activities and teachers’ techniques in the classroom. Hence, she also hopes that the further research
95 REFERENCES
Asmara, T. R. (2007). An analysis on the speaking classroom interactions at the tenth grade of SMA Negeri 7 Surakarta in the academic year 2006/2007. A thesis, Surakarta: Teacher Training and Education Faculty, Sebelas Maret University. Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxanomy of educational objectives. Handbook 1: Cognitive
domain. New York: David McKay.
Brown, H. D. 2001. Teaching by principles: an interactive approach to language pedagogy, second edition. White Plains: Longman
Brock, C. A. (1986). The effects of referential questions on ESL classroom discourse. TESOL Quarterly,20(1), 47-59.
Casanave, c.P. (J 988) Comprehension Monitoring in ESL Reading: A Neglected Essential. TESOL Quarterly, vol. 22, (pp.283-302).
Cazden, C. B. (1988). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Chaudron, C. (1988). Second language classrooms: Research on teaching and learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dalton-Puffer, C. (2007). Discourse in content and language integrated learning (CLIL) classrooms (Vol. 20): John Benjamins Publishing.
Diaz-Rico, L. T. (2013). Strategies for teaching English learners (3 nd ed.). Boston: MA: Pearson/Allyn & Bacon.
Dressing, T., & Pehl, T. (2015). Manual (on) Transcription: Transcription Conventions, Software Guides and Practical Hints for Qualitative Research. Germany: Manburg
Duff, P. (1986). Another look at interlanguage talk: taking task to task. In R. Day (Ed.), Talking to Learn. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House.
Ellis, Rod. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
96 Flanders, N. 1963. Intent, Action and Feedback, A preparation for teaching. Journal
of Teacher of Education. New York. Pp251-260.
Flanders, Ned A. (1970). Analyzing Teaching Behavior. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis. Retrieved from
http://www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/journals/ed_lead/el_196112_flanders.pdf
Gebhard, J. G. (1996). Teaching English as a foreign or second language: a teacher self-development and methodology guide. Michigan: The University of Michigan Press.
Goodman, K. S. (1967). Reading: A psycholinguistic guessing game. Journal of the Reading Specialist, 6(4), 126-135.
Goodman, Kenneth S. (1988) in Carrell et al. Interactive Approaches to L2 Reading Cambridge, CUP
Gough, P. B. (1972). One second of reading. In J. F. Kavanagh & I. G. Mattingly (Eds.), Language by ear and by eye: The relationship between speech and reading. Oxford, England: Massachusetts Inst. of Technology P.
Hakansson, G. (1986). Quantative studies of teacher talk. In Kasper (Ed.), Learning, Teaching and Communication in the Foreign Language Classroom. Aarhus: Aarhus University Press.
Harjanto, F. L. (2013). The Teacher Talk Encountered in Intensive Course of the English Department of Widya Mandala Catholic University Surabaya. A thesis, Surabaya: English Department, Widya Mandala Catholic University Surabaya. Heritage, J. (1984). Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. New York: Polity Press.
Jefferson, G. (1984b). On the organization of laughter in talk about troubles. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of Social Action (pp. 346-369). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Krashen, S.D. 1985. The Input Hypothesis: Issues and Implications. New York: Longman Inc.
Long, M. H. & Sato, C. (1983). Classroom Foreign Talk Discourse: Forms and Functions of Teacher’s Questions, in H. W. Seliger & M. H. (Eds.). Classroom Oriented Research in Language Learning (pp. 268-285). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
97 Marshall, J. C., Smart, J., & Horton, R. M. (2010). The design and validation of EQUIP: An instrument to assess inquiry-based instruction. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(2), 299-321.
Nisa, S. H. (2014). Classroom Interaction Analysis In Indonesian EFL Speaking Class. English Review: Journal of English Education, 2(2), 124-132
Nunan, D. 1989. Understanding Language Classrooms. Hemel Hempstead, Herts.: Prentice Hall
Nunan, D. (1991). Language Teaching Methodology: A Text book for Teachers. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Inc.
Nuttall, C. (1996). Teaching reading skills in a foreign language. Bath: Heinemann. Pujiastuti, R. T. (2013). Classroom Interaction: An Analysis of Teacher Talk and
Student Talk in English for Young Learners (EYL). Journal of English and Education 2013, No. 1, February
Richards, Jack C., & Schmidt, Richard. (2010). Longman: Dictionary of language teaching & Applied linguistic. Great Britain: Pearson Education.
Rummel, R. J. (1976). Understanding conflict and war: vol. 2: The conflict helix. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sukami, S & Ulfah, S. (2015). An Analysis of Teacher and Student Talk in the Classroom Interaction of the Eighth Grade of SMP Negri 18 Purworejo. A thesis, Purworejo: English Department Muhammadiyah University of Purworejo.
SHS, Vincentia. (2011). Teacher-Student Classroom Verbal Interaction in Intensive Course Classes of the English Department of Widya Mandala Catholic University Surabaya. A thesis, Surabaya: English Department, Widya Mandala Catholic University Surabaya.
Smith. F. (1973), Psychologist and Reading, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Tsui, Amy B. M. 1985. Analyzing Input and Interaction in Second Language
98 Ur, Penny. (1991). A Course in Language Teaching: Practiced and Theory.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ur, Penny. (1999). A Course in Language Teaching. Cambrige: Cambridge University Press
Urquhart, S., and Weir, S. (1998). Reading in a second language: process, product and practice. Longman.
Wagner, E. D. (1994). In support of a functional definition of interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education, 8(2), 6-29.
Wajnryb, Ruth. (1992). Classroom Observation Tasks. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Williams, E. & Moran, C. (1989). Reading in a foreign language at intermediate and advanced levels with particular reference to English. Language Teaching, 22, 217-28.
